Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Katan

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:06, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

John Katan

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not seem to pass WP:GNG T v x1 07:17, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Wrestling, Ukraine, and Canada. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:20, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - seems significantly unnotable. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:08, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Katan wrestled at least 579 matches according to Cagematch.net in Canada and the United States. There are 11,222 results for "John Katan" on Newspapers.com and 2,792 results on NewspaperArchive.com. According to SLAM.com, "For many years, Katan was considered Canada’s top heavyweight. He was a big attraction and travelled widely; particularly memorable were his three trips to Australia and New Zealand." I think he clearly passes the general notability guidelines. —Brian Halvorsen (talk) 06:55, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
All matches in non-notable events.T v x1 07:06, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't agree. He held three titles and wrestled in three NWA World Heavyweight Title matches. I think you're falling victim to recentism, "Articles deleted despite concerning notable trans-historical subject matter, because recentist article has given only flimsy and transient details available in news reports without the accompanying historical perspective, and because editors proposing deletion don't bother to research." —Brian Halvorsen (talk) 07:19, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:51, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the references above look good. It's quick to find more in newspapers.com - headline in a 1932 Chicago Tribune article. Perhaps User:Lee Vilenski can reevaluate their delete. Nfitz (talk) 03:49, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per the major expansion since the nom and the coverage found at Newspapers.com. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:14, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Thanks to WP:HEY. MrsSnoozyTurtle 08:46, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.